Wednesday, October 23, 2024

What About Those Townhouses?

The document that Eu Ting-Zambuto of Mountco distributed to members of the Common Council and Gossips reported on last week indicated that Phase 1 of the Hudson Housing Authority's redevelopment plan would include the construction of approximately ten townhouses. The following is quoted from that document:
Phase 1 is proposed to be comprised of new construction on "Site B," HHA's underutilized existing 1.4-acre site on its north end, which currently contains a basketball court, maintenance shed, and the new construction of Site A1, a vacant parcel to the west of the project's existing Columbia Apartments, along with the acquisition and new construction of approximately ten townhouses on City-owned land.
The drawing below, from an earlier conceptual plan for the project shows the location of the townhouses: nine on State Street near South Front Street; one at the corner of Warren and Front streets; and three at the corner of Second and Columbia streets. 


On Monday, at the meeting of the HHA Board of Commissioners, when Ting-Zambuto presented the Revised Preliminary Redevelopment Plan, there was no mention of the townhouses.

The three parcels on which HHA is proposing building houses actually belong to Hudson Community Development and Planning Agency (HCDPA) not to the City of Hudson. In 2022, HCDPA and HHA entered into an agreement whereby, for an annual payment of $25,000, HCDPA agreed not to sell the parcels to another entity but to hold them off the market for HHA. If HHA ultimately purchased them, the amount paid would be applied to the purchase price. If they decided not to buy them, the money would not be refundable. The agreement has been in place for two years now and is due to expire at the end of this month, on October 31, 2024.

At the HCDPA meeting last week, Dominic Merante, who chairs the HCDPA Board, brought up the fact the HCDPA's agreement with HHA expires on October 31. Revonda Smith, chair of the HHA Board of Commissioners, who in that capacity serves ex officio on the HCDPA Board, challenged the notion that the topic should be discussed. It was subsequently revealed by HCDPA legal counsel Christine Chale that members of the HCDPA Board had received an email from Mountco, HHA's development partner, requesting that the agreement be extended for two months, postponing the $25,000 payment until December 31, 2024. Because the request to modify the agreement came from the developer, who had not been party to the contract, and not HHA, the HCDPA Board decided to wait until after the HHA Board of Commissioners met the following Monday to address the issue.

At the HHA meeting on Monday, Ting-Zambuto said they were in discussion with HCDPA about extending their option to buy the parcels. Margaret Morris, treasurer of HCDPA, who was attending the meeting virtually, questioned the notion that HHA was "in discussion" with HCDPA and asked what they intended to do when the agreement expired at the end of the month. She was told they wanted the deadline for renewing the agreement and paying the $25,000 extended for two months. Morris responded by saying, "I do not understand why HHA cannot pay the $25,000 at the end of October."

Smith and Rebecca Wolff, who sits on the HHA Board, asserted it was not appropriate to discuss the agreement. Jeffrey Dodson, HHA executive director, noted, "HCDPA is not going to return the money if we decide not to go forward." Smith admonished Morris, saying, "Please think about HCDPA's mission before you speak on behalf of HCDPA," and continued, "You are making a mess of yourself. It's disgusting." Council president Tom DePietro chimed in, "Margaret does not speak for HCDPA. She speaks only for herself." Community member Ronald Kopnicki rebuked Smith, telling her, "It is the chair's obligation to keep order. Calling people 'disgusting' is not appropriate."

As it turned out, Dodson had a resolution prepared requesting that HCDPA extend the deadline for renewing HHA's option to buy the parcels until the end of the year. The resolution received the unanimous support from the HHA commissioners. A special meeting of the HCDPA Board has been scheduled for Monday, October 28, at 5:00 p.m. to consider the request.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK

3 comments:

  1. Good for Margaret asking the appropriate questions of a fiduciary of the HCDPA and for Mr. Merante for refusing to let the conversation be stifled before it began. This is what leadership looks like.

    How sad that fellow board members would attack Ms. Morris's diligence while simultaneously morphing their own nonfeasance into malfeasance. And how about that Ms. Smith. She seems perhaps to have no governor on either her speech or behavior. The hypocrisy of public officials being lectured about proprietary by the walking, talking embodiment of a conflict of interest is a spectacle, even today.

    But leaving the needlessly nasty, borderline criminal and Trumpian antics of Hudson's "leaders" aside, why can't the HHA make its option payment? And why aren't the other HCDPA board members (the ones without a conflict) asking the same question? Why is the HHA board unwilling to answer? Is it so mismanaged that it spent all its free cash on an option it now can no longer afford to exercise? Why is all this being done at the last minute, when mistakes are more likely to be made, when both the HHA and the HCDPA knew the existing agreement was due to expire?

    ReplyDelete
  2. HHA seems to have given the reins over the Mountco to act as their agent. Both boards should uphold their fiduciary obligations, although some may find that disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So Margaret Morris is chastised for asking appropriate questions as Treasurer of HCDPA? I would be curious how many people have taken their ABO training and actually understand what they're tasked to do as board members or what it means to be a fiduciary.
    What's disgusting is the divisiveness throughout the City. To silence dissent, our "leaders" call out the very people they're elected to represent as disgusting or racist. It's a sad but powerful way to chill speech, and we shouldn't tolerate this sort of behavior.

    ReplyDelete